You're correct that we have used multiple looks throughout the season. Your point is valid. Will be interesting who is quicker to adjust to these looks and the counters the Lakers provide to attack them.
That makes no sense. It's not about confusing him, it's about forcing him to make a read. Hes not always going to make the right read and it takes a split second to make a read which could be crucial to recovering/rotating etc. That's better than him knowing exactly how our defense will be setup before he even comes off the screen. Theres no reason we should get confused if we have to execute more than one defensive scheme.... this is the NBA, guys shouldnt struggle with that.
And let me make sure people here this: DROP Scheme is the worst scheme to run against a LeBron and AD pick n roll. If that's all we run and we give up 130 because of it, I'll be very frustrated. Meanwhile others will say "Ariza" as our defensive scheme has no impact on anything.
I think we agree. We will give them multiple looks and the Lakers will give us multiple counters to those looks. Will Lebron's ability to react to those looks be more effective that our ability to react to his counters? Seems pretty straight forward to me. Unless you think the Lakers will run the same attack against all our defensive looks?
Are you sure we'll give them multiple looks? That's not really Stotts' style. The main thing with our defense is how we guard the pick n roll so to answer your last question, that's the same offensive action in general. I just dont want us to constantly run the scheme that let's LeBron get a head of steam downhill in a two on one with Anthony Davis against our dropping big. That'll be a recipe for disaster, especially if that's all we do since LeBron will perfect his attack against it throughout the game and series. The other important part that Stotts has direct control over is how and where we double team.
I'm pretty confident we'll give multiple looks. Now will everyone on here be able to tell the differences between those looks? I don't know.
how many of those multiple looks will be by design, and how many will be because Blazers are confused on defense?
That's an interesting question. Kinda goes back to my original point of if the multiple looks will cause more confusion for the Lakers or our inexperienced players. I know Dame was talking about how he blew his assignment on defensive two plays in a row and needed to be held accountable. So even guys like Dame who have a ton of experience and know what they're supposed to do still blow coverages. It's a players league.
Exactly. Can i add that sometimes a great player will make the right read no matter what you do. But if you are consistently making him think you have at least given your defense a chance.
That is the next issue. First off the Drop "scheme' type defense will work at times. But it ain't gonna work against Davis. Dude can shoot the three or drive or pass. Now when they have McGee in there they can do it a bit. Also there are some weak side rotations that change the coverage a bit and mess thing up for the big. If the rotation is fast enough they can keep him from putting the ball on the floor and make him have to rethink his move. If that happens you can hope they have burnt enough clock they have to hurry a shot. So not all drop defense issues are the same. Kind of depends on who you have in there. It's only one scheme that might have two or three wrinkles. There better be more looks.
What defensive scheme do you think will cause LeBron and AD confusion? Specifically, when we have Whiteside out on the floor, are you comfortable with his ability to hedge/double, recover, and close out on 3pt shooters? Do you think we have players that we can put on LeBron/AD that can stay with them laterally and obstruct their vision at the same time? Who are those guys? Doubling or hedging with slow, undersized players will certainly be a layup drill against a tall Lakers team.
Uh... they're doing exactly what I asked and this has been their best defensive quarter of maybe the entire season.
Like us, they're built a little funky. Their top two players are obviously better than ours, and their role players have better size that us, but teams who can't shoot are always going to be exposed to losing on nights like tonight. Even with 3 head coaches on their bench, it's hard to find ways to win if you can shoot!
It's a total farce. Hopefully it's just people using the same logic against those who think all the made threes against us are because of Terry's defense.
